• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Cosmological argument

Extracts from this document...


"Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument. To what extent do the weaknesses of this argument limit its effectiveness." The cosmological argument aims to provide a method of proving god exists by using the logic that there had to be a first cause in the Universe. This was first proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas in the first three of his Five Ways. His first way of trying to prove God's existence was motion or change. What he says is that in the world things are in motion or changing. Whatever is in motion must have been moved by something else. There can be no infinite regress of motion, therefore there must have been a first Mover which itself as unmoved. This Unmoved Mover began this chain of movement and this Mover was God. Something cannot move or change itself as it would have to be actual and potential at the same time. An object has the potential to move but does not actually move until something causes it do so. For example, wood has the potential to be hot but it is not until it has been set alight. However, the First Way goes against Newton's first law of motion, in which movement can be explained by a body's own inertia from previous motion. ...read more.


The universe is the totality of all things. Therefore, the Universe is contingent. As there must be a sufficient reason for everything, there must be a cause for the universe or a necessary being as Copleston called it. This necessary being must be eternal, non-contingent, and metaphysical. This necessary being is God. As you can see Copleston's theory of contingency depends on the Principle of Sufficient Reason as put forward by Gottfried Leibniz. He said that nothing takes place without a sufficient reason. Thus, everything requires a complete explanation. You cannot describe your existence by saying that you are the child of your parents as this gives only a partial explanation. For a complete or sufficient reason, we must go back until there is something that is non-contingent. This is what Leibniz calls God. As can be seen, acceptance of Copleston's theory of contingency depends on your acceptance of the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Another flaw, however, was pointed out by Bertrand Russell in this same debate. He said that Copleston believes that the qualities of the part must be reflected in the whole. If the parts are contingent then the whole is contingent. However, this isn't necessarily true. All humans have mums yet humanity (the totality of humans) doesn't have an overall mum. ...read more.


By following the logic further the principle itself needs a sufficient reason as everything must have a sufficient reason. This would lead to an infinite regress of reasons and as proved by the Kalam Argument this cannot exist. Modern science further weakens the cosmological argument. The Big Bang provides a scientific explanation of the first cause of the universe, and thus eliminates the necessity for a God. The Steady State theory states that the universe has always existed as it is now, and thus is eternal. This eliminates the necessity for a first cause to the Universe. It seems that there needn't be a God for the universe to exist. Furthermore, Quentin Smith used quantum mechanics to demonstrate the possibility of things existing without a direct cause. The universe may have had a beginning, but there is not reason to think that it is God. As in the teleological argument, there may be a creator to the universe but who goes to say there can't be many? In conclusion, I believe the weaknesses outweigh the strengths of the design argument. While there may be no infinite regress of time in the Universe, there is no reason to assume that this first cause is God. While I may disagree with Hume in that there is no infinite regress I agree with him that his beginning need not be God. Therefore, I believe the cosmological argument alone to not be a sufficient proof of the existence of God. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument

    thus this starter of the series is God as he cause the series to start. This interpretation sees causation in terms of the factors that sustain an event or keep it going once it has begun. For example, a farmer may plant a seed to grow in that patch of

  2. The Teleological Argument.

    Swinburne's argument is very weak in saying that there is only one God because the argument is simpler to understand. As the probability of there being more than one God goes against everything about the God of classical theism, this is hard to believe but still possible.

  1. What are the key features of the design argument for the existence of God? ...

    He argued that the universe consisted of particles in random motion, and albeit the initial state was chaotic the natural forces evolved into an ordered system. Furthermore, because the universe is eternal and unlimited it was inevitable that a constant order would develop.

  2. Outline the key strengths and weaknesses of the teleological argument.

    Another important reformulation is that put forward by Richard Swinburne in his book, the Existence of God, in which he suggests the universe was made without strict rules. To this extent man can forge his own future to a degree and either improve or harm the universe around him, without the need to blame God.

  1. The Cosmological Argument

    However it has many weaknesses. A number of objections have been raised against the cosmological argument, which those who support it have had to counter. One of the major objections to this argument has been the suggestion that infinity is impossible and that the universe had a beginning.

  2. Bertrand Russell and Atheism.

    Many religious teachings forbid homosexual love. If you are gay, you have evil spirits working on your mind. Religion also splits people rather than joining them.

  1. A Big Bang Cosmological Argument for God's Nonexistence

    big bang theory,' which is based on Friedmann's solutions to the equations of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems. I shall explain these ideas in an introductory and nontechnical manner in section 2, so that philosophers who are unfamiliar with this theory may follow my argument.

  2. Explain the Ontological argument.

    This means that the argument is based on the end or 'teleos.' It is also a 'posteriori' argument, in that it attempts to prove Gods existence through the apparent observations of the order in the universe to conclude that it is not the result of mere chance, but of design for example, the change in seasons.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work